The<i>Alberta Mental Health Act 2010</i>and Revolving Door Syndrome: Control, Care, and Identity in Making up People
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, I describe dividing practices in making up a specific medical-legal category-the revolving door patient-to identify, label, and direct the actions of particular people living with mental illness. The revolving door patient was a category that had been spoken of for some time, but became a formal legal subject with the introduction of the Alberta Mental Health Act 2010 and Community Treatment Orders (CTOs). I demonstrate how a rationale of control over unpredictable and dangerous individuals was primary in creating this new category, and that the characterization of the revolving door patient required a disciplinary technology to reduce danger. I argue that the CTO is a medical-legal technology that solves the problem of governing a subject in order to produce a patient that manages mental illness. I conclude by reflecting on how the narrative of the revolving door patient, and of mental illness more broadly, has implications for personal identity and tensions between care and control. Dans cet article, je décris comment des 'pratiques divisées' ont créé une catégorie spécifique médico-légale - le « revolving door patient » - afin d'identifier, d'étiqueter et de contrôler les comportements de certains individus vivants avec une maladie mentale. Le «revolving door patient», une catégorie dont on avait parlé depuis un certain temps, est devenu un sujet juridique formel par l'introduction de la loi de la santé mentale de l'Alberta 2010 et de l'Ordre de Traitement Communautaire (OCT). Je démontre comment une logique de contrôle sur les individus imprévisibles et dangereux eu un rôle prépondérant lors de la création de cette catégorie et que la caractérisation du «revolving door patient», entant que telle, a nécessité une technologie disciplinaire pour réduire le danger social. Je soutiens que le OTC est une technologie médico-légale qui résout le problème de contrôle d'un sujet en produisant un patient qui gère une maladie mentale. Je conclus en démontrant de quelle façon le «revolving door patient», et la maladie mentale en général, a des répercussions sur l'identité personnelle et produisent des tensions entre les soins et le contrôle.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.051 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".